There is a common assumption that religion and science are in conflict. It’s not true. Thomas Aquinas has said that when science contradicts scripture it’s because science has not yet caught up with scripture.
Many discoveries in the last many decades seem to support his notion.
The Bible tells us that the river flowing out of Eden separated into four other rivers: the Tigris; the Euphrates; the Pishon; and the Gihon. This appeared to be wrong. The Tigris and Euphrates were well known, but where were the other two? After centuries of dismissing the four rivers of Eden as mythology, science finally caught up. In 1987, satellite photography revealed two ancient river beds, right where the Bible said they would be. They were hidden for so very long because scientists did not have any way to discover them. New technology allowed them to see what the Bible knew all along.
Was the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorra also fable? Did these cities ever even exist? The remains of these cities lay undiscovered until 2008. The ruins were covered with a thick layer of ash which supports the Biblical account in every physical particular. Scientific theory posits, as explication, that both of these ancient cities were demolished by a single gigantic airblast; the result of an in-air explosion of a very large meteor. Does that sound a lot like fire and brimstone raining from the sky? There’s not much difference between these two accounts except that the scientific reading is dry and precise, while the Biblical story is more interestingly told.
In the opening lines of Genesis, we learn that, “In the beginning the world was without form or void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep. Then God said let there be light, and there was light”. Science, in the form of, ‘Big Bang”, theory tells us that the entire universe was created from an infinitesimally small point, in less than an instant. In the first case, God did it. In the second case, …?
Science can tell us what happened.
Only the Bible tells us why.
Old Testament time-lines conflict with scientific time-lines. This may not be a real conflict. The Hebrew word for day was also used to mean a certain period in which something large happened. Clock-time was not intended. We might refer to, “the day of the dinosaur”, but no one thinks we’re saying that the dinosaurs were only around for 24 hours. Likewise, when Genesis tells us that God created such-and-such on day one, and something else on day two, and so on, it is not an expression of time, but of disparate epochal events.
The scientifically explained sequence of these epochal events corresponds to the Biblical sequence.
Time is what you make of it.
Science is concerned with the precise measure of physical reality. Religion is concerned with verities that are eternal and immeasurable. It’s not so much that they disagree, as it is that they’re not even engaged in the same conversation. Science and religion both try to discover what’s true, but their focus is very different.
Science probes the worldly. Religion contemplates the supernatural.
Science relies on instruments. Religion relies on Revelation.
Sometimes the orbits of the two worlds overlap.
These occasional tangent points allow the correspondence that Thomas Aquinas was talking about. I’ve noted three examples. There are many more, and each year, new examples are discovered. That said, Science will never completely validate scripture and religion isn’t much concerned about whether it does, or doesn’t. The Bible was never intended as textbook or history. Its main purpose was to codify wisdom and proscribe moral goodness. Some have described it as a User’s Guide for life in a fallen world.
Science and religion are each valid in their own realm.
Science represents Caesar. Religion represents God.
Jesus said, “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and render unto God that which is God’s”.
Just so.